listen2me 23

It is a roll of the dice for sure. I think bad hammys for speed WRs is worse than a small frame in todays game. Desean Jackson has stayed fairly healthy.

If GB goes WR with one of their first 3 picks then Hollywood I think would be that guy. They have other bases at WR covered a couple times over. They are lacking and have seemingly alwayd lacked a real weapon who scares opposing DCs. Brown would be that guy, where as the bigger WRs in this class would be another version of Allison, Adams, MVS, or ESB.

I know you are doing the fantasy-dynasty studs. But Jace Sternberger would be a nice one to do. 2nd rounder. Sort of forgotten because of the top 3. Pretty natural pass catcher.

I dont even know of Tonyan can block. Jimmy cant. It is no wonder they resigned Lewis who is basically another tackle. And like 49 years old.

That would be quite the assumption that Tonyan is the future. He has raw skills. Even in a down year with injuries he hardly saw the field. Made a nice TD catch I remember. Had a nixe preseason. I hope they arent just banking on him and I highly doubt it. Lafleur loves TEs. Likes to use 2 TE sets. Jimmy was terrible and slow last year. That made it 2 years in a row they brought in an old, huge, slow TE that amounted to not much. Jimmy is gone after next year. TE takes some time to develop. TE is waaaaay more of a need than WR. And I think Packers feel the same. If they like a specidic WR i wouldnt be surprised if they took him at 30. But I dont think they are pressed for a WR. They already have youth size and some speed.

Packers need a TE. I just dont know the value with TE at 12. 30th I would be fine with but who knows if any of the top 3 guys would last that long. Really like Hockenson but he would have to be taken at 12, if he is even there.

Bill Russell won 11 championships Wooden coached UCLA to 10 in 12 years Most people say these guys were great. All timers. And most would concede that it was probably easier to win back then. Cream rised. Those 2 marks are basically impossible in today's world. But when it comes to this golf stuff no one can concede that. Logic isnt used. Players actually have gotten much worse and their is less competition. Some how.

Ive went over this before. And im not saying Tiger is better. You cant really compare eras in any sport. Not even the argument Im having in this thread. But to talk with basic logic I would say...would the fact that many guys won multiple time be a prime example of it being easier to win back then and the cream rising the the top.? -technology over the year has made it easier for more pros to win. Narrowed the gap. Less technology meant the very best could separate themselves. Is that not logical? -in any sport ever you would say players have gotten better over time. Expect for people on your side of the fence on this. Back in the 50s 60s and even 70s not all the guys even made it to the British Open. A lot of Euros didnt come over to America to play in the other 3 majors. Golf has gotten more and more popular spanning many more countries. Molinari from Italy for example. More talent is found and given a chance. More tours to get players ready. It is simple logic to expect players to be better as years go on.

No one is claiming to have sympathy. This reminds me of what a co-worker (you guessed it who doesnt like Tiger) saod to me. I brought his comeback route. He says "he brought that on himself" Well partly "no duh". That isnt thr point. The fact is he was taking chipping lessons from Stricker before an event. He didnt play in any majors for 2 years in a row, missing many others. Several injuries to every part of his body. Went from the top to people thinking he had zero chance of even comepeting out on tour. Fact is that happened. All of it. And then he worked hi way back and won thr Masters. You dont have to feel sorry for him to acknowledge what just went down the last 2 3 4 years.

No you dont. But people hate Tiger and clouds their judgement. Sderk. Posty. Prime examples. Others here down play last weekend when they wrote him off completely not long ago. Other run straight to Jacks defense when there is no one attacking him. I get it though. Jack is done playing. His fans and people that hate Tiger will go overboard in defense of his legacy.

Oh the youth joke. Bitterness continues. I said jacks 18 and numerous 2nd is impressive and Tiger fans respect it. You know the discussion is how old vs new is handling this. Then you come with the exact numbers randomly for no real reason other than being defensive. We dont hear the same things and Im closer to the youth and Tiger era fans than you are. Ive played golf for 25 years and play 2 times a week. None of my friends, a few raging Tiger fan...ever down what Jack did. Actually most are amazed by the number 18. They didnt see it. But they have seen Tiger win at an alarming rate and to know he was still 4 short for years amazed them and still does. Everyone respects what Jack did. We must have completey different experiences. But call me names and stay on your defensive mode. You prove my point.

Where? Young old tiger fan non tiger fan......I hardly ever hear anyone say Jack was overrated or tear him down. Are you on twitter or something talking to 12 year olds? Who exactly says anything bad about Jack? 18 is amazing. He set the bar so far ahead. Like Jerry Rice or Wayne Gretzky. This thread is proof enough of Jacks little fans of yesterday and how they feel about Tiger. Different POV we will see it different. But I see Tiger fan excited to chase Jack again. I see Jack fan as bitter, generally. Even though their hero is as gracious as they come. Even your random quip about his top 3s was a stamp of your bitterness.

Im not even one to say Tiger is better than Jack. But there is certainly an argument to have. And if he gets to 18 or hell even 16 or 17 then his resume is basically the same with how many more wins he has. Im just tired of the past backers passing off false claims like Tiger played bums Jack didnt. Or it was harder to win back then (when simple logic woulf suggest otherwise. And actual pros would probably agree). Neither one has to be better than the other. Tiger backers applaud and marvel at Jacks 18 and numerous 2nds. The ol jack fans sit and try to tear down anything Tiger does. There is a stark difference.

Yeah no comparison to Orville Moody. Tommy Aaron. Charles Coody. Dave Marr. Lou Graham. Yes you are so right. In Jacks day there were NEVER any no names to win majors. These guys are all legends.

Im not. Its the defensive nature of it. YOU guy are the ones who bring up Jack today. Because you are defensive about your hero of yesteryear. I get it. You werent even one of the ones I am talking about here. You gave props. Others peoples thoughts on the matter is its overhyped and jacks was better. Almost like big deal. Same people want to play on the side that he is totally washed up and overrated. Are the same people who now act like winning a FOCKING grean Jacket 2 years after chipping like a 25 handicap isnt amazing. Predictable. To not stop short of giving Tiger total props would be blasphemy to you hero of the past. It cant just be amazing. Its amazing but it isnt jack and every gave up fot him is the narrative with some here already.